Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/10/1996Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 -1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1.2 13 14 15 1'6 17 1S 1'9 20 21 22 23 24 2 -5 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 33 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 CITY OF PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION MIINUTES REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY HALL - PETALUMA, CA SEPTEMBER 10, 1996 7:00 PM Commissioners Present: Bennett, Feibusch, Thompson. vonRaesfeld, Wick Commissioners Absent: Maguire, Rahman Staff: Pamela Tuft, Planning Director James McCann, Principal Planner * Chairperson PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of August 27. 1996 were approved with correction to page 10 (amendment of the Corona Creek II conditions of approval). PUBLIC COMMENT: None. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Budget Update COM`IISSIONER'S REPORT: Commissioner Bennett inquired regarding Department's printing policy (duplexing to all extent possible). CORRESPONDENCE: Revised list of appointments to the Commission's Committee assignments. APPEAL STATEMENT: Was read. LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda. NOTE: OLD BUSINESS Italic =Addition Overstrike = Deletion I. PETALUMA JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL GENERAL. PLAN AMENDMENT; 700 BANTAM WAY (AP NO. 006 -441 -022) (GPA 96003)om). Continued consideration and recommendation to the City Council for a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of a 1.2 acre portion of the Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 school site from "School" to "Urban Standard" to allow the subdivision of the 2 property into four single- family lots. The project includes requests for: 1) a 3 Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) a General Plan Amendment. t7 4 5 Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of August 27, 1996 (public 6 hearing was closed). 7 8 Principal Planner McCann presented the staff report. 9 10 Discussion: 11 12 Commissioner Feibusch - Clarification of proposed parking improvement timeline. 13 Commissioner Thompson - Understood that one of the main problems was dropping -off 14 and picking -up. not parking: what about the timing of street improvements. 15 16 Commission consensus to reopen public hearing for new information only. 17 18 Gene Peele - Bantam Way resident - New parking is still inadequate; property sale should 19 be held up until parking adequacy is determined (with new additional parking proposed). 20 Assistant Citv Manager Salmons - Former member of Blue Ribbon Needs Commission - 21 encourages support of this amendment request; Citizen's Committee recommended 22 support of this request; this action follows very directly from 1959 recommendation; 23 noted that the proceeds from the sale of surplus property would alloy the construction of 24 a new administration building which would in turn allow the existing administration 25 building to be utilized for alternate uses. 26 Commissioner vonRaesfeld One reservation is parking problem solution - inadequate; 27 this problem should be addressed first. 28 Commissioner Thompson - In favor of this sale, but concerns with parking adequacy; 29 should be more certain of how to resolve this parking problem. 30 Commissioner Bennett - Would this come back to Planning Commission prior to map? 31 Planning Director Tuft - Parking questions can be addressed through Parcel Map. 32 Commissioner Bennett - Two problems - dropping off as -,yell as parking; policing 33 problem: add condition or directions to staff that problem has to be solved. 34 Planning_ Director Tuft - Feels confident that staff can work with School District to 35 resolve this problem; has been working with District on design solutions. 36 37 A motion was made by Commissioner Feibusch and seconded by Commissioner 38 vonRaesfeld to recommend to the City Council adoption of a Negative Declaration and 39 approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation for the 1.2 40 acre portion of the Petaluma Junior High School site from "School" to "Urban Standard" 41 based on the findings listed below as amended by Commission: 42 43 Commissioner Maguire: Absent 44 Commissioner Bennett: Yes 45 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes 46 Commissioner Rahman: Absent 47 Commissioner Thompson: Yes 48 Commissioner vonRaesfeld: Yes 49 Chairman Wick: No - would like previous comments made by Commissioners Wick and 50 Rahman to be relayed to City Council 51 52 Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 Environmental Findings: 3 1. On the basis of the Initial Study, there is no substantial evidence that the project 4 as conditioned would have a significant effect on the environment. 6 2. Through the Initial Study, Planning Staff has evaluated the potential for this 7 project to cause an adverse effect -- either individually or cumulatively on wildlife 8 resources and there is no evidence that the proposed project would have any 9 potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources because the property is located 10 within an entirely developed neighborhood and «ill not involve any physical 11 changes to the property or to its use. 12 13 Proposed Mitigations: 14 15 (1) All grading and erosion control shall conform to the City of Petaluma's Erosion 1,6 Control Ordinance 17.31. 17 is (2) Watering of the site to reduce airborne dust levels shall be implemented if dust 19 generated during the grading process threatens to travel off site due to wind y 20 currents. 21 22 (3) All motor powered vehicles and equipment shall be properly equipped with 23 systems to reduce emissions. Haul trucks carrying dirt on or off -site shall be 24 covered with tarps. 25 26 (1) The project proponent shall be responsible to pay- a proportionate share for storm 27 drainage system impacts pursuant to the City's Special Development Fees. 29 (5) All grading activity shall be completed prior to the onset of the rainy season. All 30 new drainage facilities shall be in place and in operation at that time. Grading and 31 excavation activities shall not be permitted during the rainy season. Extensions 32 for grading and drainage facilities work may be allowed in consultation with the 33 Petaluma City Engineer, based on the sensitivity of the specific project area to 34 erosion, sedimentation, and the effectiveness of temporary (rainy season) erosion 35 measures to be implemented by the applicant. 36 37 (6) Plans submitted at time of application for a building permit shall include 38 provisions for storm water runoff management. The submittal shall reflect 39 installation of permanent signs at drop inlets to the public storm drain system. 40 which prohibit the deposit of hazardous materials into the system. 41 42 (7) Construction hours shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 am to 5:00 p.m., 43 Monday through Saturday; none on Sundays and holidays recognized by the City 44 of Petaluma. The vehicles and/or equipment used for the project shall be required 45 to comply with all vehicle codes pertaining to noise. as applicable. 46 47 (8) The name and phone number of a the construction site foreman who can be 48 contacted regarding noise complaints during construction shall be made available 49 to the Petaluma Junior High Administrative staff. 5,0 51 (9) This project shall be subject to the City-'s Special Development Fees as specified 52 for traffic mitigation. 53 3 Plannins Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 (10) The project proponents shall be responsible for a fair share contribution to the 2 City's Community Facilities Development as outlined in the current Special 3 Development Fees handout. School fees shall be paid directly to the school 4 district. 5 6 (11) In the event that archaeological /historical remains are encountered during grading, 7 work shall be halted temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted 8 to evaluate the artifacts and to recommend future action. The identified Indian 9 community shall also be notified and consulted in the event any archaeological 10 remains are uncovered. 11 12 (12) The School District shall design and construct a guest parking lot (with 60 -80 13 spaces) in the southwest corner of the Junior High School property as generally 14 reflected in the September 3, 1996 letter from Steve Bolman, Assistant 15 Superintendent, prior to the approval of any subdivision (Final Map approval) of 16 the school property or by the commencement of the 1997 school year. 17 18 (13) The School District shall work with the City staff to design an improved/alternate 19 student drop -off /pick -up arrangement. Said improvements shall be installed prior 20 to the commencement of the 1997 school year. 21 22 General Plan Amendment findings 23 24 1. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the Petaluma General Plan and 25 will help to implement goals, objectives and programs of the General Plan relating 26 to the development of underutilized properties with residential uses and 27 encouraLnn development within the Urban Limit Line. v 28 29 2. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest to provide for 30 orderly development of appropriate residential uses. 31 32 3. The proposed Amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the 33 General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected. 34 35 4. The potential impacts of the proposed Amendment have been assessed and have 36 been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 37 38 5. The proposed Amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable 39 provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental 40 Quality Act (CEQA). 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 NEW BLiSINESS 48 PUBLIC HEARING 49 4 Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 II. CROSS CREEK; iNIARDEL LLC; ELY BLVD. SOUTH AT CASA 2 GRANDE ROAD; AP NO. 017 - 050 -001; FILES: 0068, 3 GPA/ ANY /PREZ/PTSM 07 -95; REZ96; (jm /tp). 5 1) Referral by the City Council for consideration and formal recommendation 6 on the PUD Development Plan and Pretentative Subdivision Map to create 7 a maximum of 205 detached single - family homes on approximately 47.5 8 acres; and 9 2) Consideration of and recommendation to the Cit Council on the proposed 10 Development Agreement establishing terms for dedication of 48.5 acres, 1`1 construction of two ballfields, and regulation of development within the 1'2 Cross Creek Subdivision site. 13 14 Commissioner Bennett - Reviewed all tapes /Minutes, will participate in discussion 15 tonight. 16 1' -7 Principal Planner McCann presented the staff report. is 19 The public hearing was opened. 20 21 SPEAKERS: 22 23 Commissioner Feibusch - Is a building permit required for a garage conversion? (answer 24 yes); will utilities on Casa Grande be undergrounded? (ans"yer yes. what is possible to be 25 undergrounded). 26 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - In older scheme including coum - ard homes._ how have 27 landscape plans changed? y 28 Principal Planner N - Landscape plans (especially the Casa Grande frontage 29 concept) for most part will remain the same. 30 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - '% ill these plans still be in effect? :31 Principal Planner %JcCann - Yes. but can be restated. 32 Commissioner Bennett - Will land outside Urban Limit Line still be Cite- o%vned land, 33 and able to apply for grants (answer yes); without courtyard units. Nyill economic and 34 design diversity still be offered per General Plan? :35 Principal Planner McCann - Yes, significant diversity will be provided through the 10 36 different? house plans; will still be diversity, though not as much as originally with the 37 courtyard homes. - 38 Commissioner Bennett - In opinion of staff does this still provide necessary diversity? 39 Planning Director Tuft - Yes. still meets economic diversity for a range in home prices 40 with 10% of the units incorporating a detached garage design. 41 Matt Hudson - General price range and diversity similar as with original courtyard units; 42 presented letter listing 10 aspects of project; 149 "traditional" lots; "garden lots" - 43 $190,000 /$240,000; would like Wren Drive to be closed to through traffic (no cul -de -sac) 44 - question regarding garbage trucks, delivery trucks, etc.; possible area for turn- around, 45 more sensible approach, less concrete; City Engineer and Fire Marshal indicate cul -de -sac 46 required; does not want traditional cul -de -sac at end of Wren; typical lot size varies, but '47 there are several that are smaller (3,300 sq.ft.) than originally contemplated and as 48 reflected in the recommended conditions (an amendment to PUD Condition 3a.(5) is 49 necessary). 50 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - Questions regarding hammerhead versus cul -de -sac. Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 Principal Planner McCann - Referenced the adopted mitigation measures and indicated 2 that the Fire Marshal and City Engineer had requested that Wren Lane include the 3 provision of a cul -de -sac. 4 Rich Moran - 1212 Wren Lane = Commission should direct applicant to include a 50 -60 5 foot buffer between developments; has not seen this as an alternative in any staff report; 6 concept should be looked at; regarding Wren Lane issue - xvhv is access being brought up 7 now - why wasn't this issue brought up when existing developments were built; current 8 proposal (no cul -de -sac) by developer is fine. 9 Don Weisenfluh - Wren Drive - (presented letter raising a number of concerns) agrees 10 with preceding speaker; disappointed by City Council action; noted that ownership of 11 land outside of City Limits has financial ramifications; concerned that project is not 12 consistent with the requirements of the General Plan (useable open space, Page 20, 13 Objective O); suggested that Urban Limit Line should be moved and the lots spread over 14 the 48 = acres to eliminate the small lots; believes that a landscaped open space buffer 15 (50 -60' wide) should be established between the proposed project and the adjacent 16 development (similar to landscaped area at Monroe Street /Sonoma Mountain Parkway). 17 Dovle Heaton - Applicant - Have been working on this plan over two years; feels that 18 diversity in housing is being provided; 10 plans. 10% with detached garage; many cul -de- 19 sacs: should not be governed by just a few homeowners in area; worked for 2 years to 20 resolve problems: this'project has been under a microscope, more than any other project. 21 Dave Teacong - 7 Brinale Court - Old Adobe School is bursting at seams because class 22 size has been reduced; was this reduction taken into consideration when this project was 23 planned: are ball fields still proposed in approach zone: ramifications of the Williamson 24 Act: still concerned with the drainage situation between two subdivisions; this has been 25 good process which has resulted in an improved project. 26 Val Hinshaw - 1064 Wren - Supports Mr. Moran's comments regarding buffer between 27 neighborhoods: Lots 2 and 3 will abutt her property - these units are proposed to be two - 28 story units - would like these to be reduced to one -stop units. 29 Matt Hudson - Lot 3 is a one -story unit; William Act expires in February, 1997; ballpark 30 still part of our proposal. 31 32 The public hearing on the Development Agreement was continued to the Planning 33 Commission meeting of September 24, 1996. 34 35 The public hearing for the balance of this item was closed. 36 37 Commission Discussion: 38 39 Planning Director Tuft - Described background on the creation of open space on Monroe 40 - not intended to meet General Plan policies (approved prior to this General Plan) - 41 remainder property when required to provide adequate separation of new road to 42 neighboring streets and residential lots; read the General Plan objective being discussed 43 and noted that the speakers are using it out of context; this project does not contain area 44 designated as a park, City could not purchase property_- (the suggested buffer). 45 Commissioner Thompson - Regarding garden units - along Elv Boulevard South up to 46 church, all units are single -story, need more single -story homes in this location; happy 47 with chances made by developer in response to previous comments. 48 Commissioner Wick - Issues: Open space (answered adequately by staff); Wren Lane 49 turn- around (Council allowed sufficient latitude in the mitigation measure) - current 50 proposal more suitable than hammerhead or cul -de -sac - if current proposal not 51 acceptable, should be a full City street. 52 Planning Director Tuft - Was Village East project planner - intent of the "stubbing" of 53 Wren was that there would be a full street extension when this site developed. Planning Commission Minutes - September 10. 1996 1 Commissioner Wick - Access proposed (pedestrian and emergency vehicles) between two 2 streets sufficient;, story-mix on Ely Boulevard South was acceptable. 3 Commissioner Wick - Minimum 50% of homes along Ely Boulevard South should be 4 single - story. r 5 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - Coming into town on Casa Grande first garden home is 6 two -stop. - should be a one - story. 7 Commissioner Wick - Condition No. 10 - request from project sponsor to not return to 8 Planning, Commission - the mitigated plan and staffs conditions provide enough detail. 9 revised plan does not need to return for Commission review. 10 Commissioner vonRaesfeld - Add language indicating landscaping concept (frontage 1;1 landscaping) to remain as proposed. 12 13 A motion was made by Commissioner vonRaesfeld and seconded by Commissioner 14 Thompson to recommend to the City Council approval of the PUD Development Plan 15 and Standards and the Pretentative Subdivision map for the Cross Creek Subdivision 16 based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: 17 is Commissioner Maguire: Absent 19 Commissioner Bennett: Yes 20 Commissioner Feibusch: Yes 21 Commissioner Rahman: Absent 22 Commissioner Thompson: Yes 23 Commissioner vonRaesfeld: Yes 24 Chairman Wick: Yes 25 26 Findings for PUD Develonment Plan 27 28 1. The Cross Creek project is proposed on property which has a suitable relationship 29 to one or more thoroughfares (Casa Grande Road. Ely Boulevard So.), and that 30 said thoroughfares, with the improvements herein required are adequate to carry 31 any additional traffic generated by the development. 32 33 2. The plan for the Cross Creek development presents a unified and organized 34 arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to 35 adjacent or nearby properties and adequate landscaping and screening is included 36 to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. 37 38 1 The natural and scenic qualities of the site are protected through conditions of 39 approval requiring provision of larger lots at the edge of the Urban Separator. 40 design of streets to permit views of the Sonoma Mountains, implementation of a 41 pedestrian/bicycle system within the Urban Separator, restoration of Adobe 42 Creek and provision of a substantial landscape buffer along the frontages of Casa 43 Grande Road and Ely Boulevard South. 44 45 4. Adequate public and private spaces have been designated on the Cross Creek 46 PUTD Development Plan, through the dedication of land for Urban Separator and 47 Open Space, and conditions requiring reduction in the total project density to not 48 more than 205 units maximum. and reconfiguration of the courtyard development 49 portion of the project to reflect more traditional single family development .50 patterns. 51 Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 5. The development of the subject Cross Creek property in the manner proposed by 2 the applicant, and as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, 3 will be in the best interests of the City and will be in keeping with the general 4 intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma, with the 5 Petaluma General Plan, and with other applicable plans adopted by the Citv. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Conditions of PUD Approval All mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Cross Creek Project as specified under Resolution No. 96 -178 N.C.S., are incorporated herein by reference as conditions of project approval. 2. Prior to application for SPARC review, the PUD Development Plan shall be amended to reflect the following. and shall be subject to SPARC approval: a. Reconfiguration of the courtyard component of development, in accordance with adopted mitigation measures, to reflect more traditional /typical detached sin family residential development patterns and home styles' No courtyard or quad -lot configurations may be used, but smaller lots and flag lots with common driveways serving not more than two units may be utilized. b. Reconf guration of lots directly abutting the Urban Separator. to reflect an average lot area of 10.000 square feet. in accordance with adopted mitigation measures. C. Elimination of the public street vehicular connection with the existing Wren Lane, in accordance with adopted mitigation measures, and Engineering requirements. " e. Location of single story unit plans adjacent to existing single stop homes. f. Incorporation of the proposed architectural plans, unit distribution plan and setbacks for the units proposed to replace the courtyard homes, and amendment to the typical details for the Country home /Coum and home developments, consistent with the written standards. g. Incorporation of all modifications necessary to reflect consistency with the approved Pretentative Map. h. A maximum of 205 total dwelling units shall be permitted for the project. i. At least 50% of the homes adjacent to Ely Boulevard South shall be single -story construction. j. Frontage landscape treatment of Casa Grande Road shall be consistent with the original concept. 8 Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 J. Prior to application for SPARC approval of the PUB Development Plan, the 2 written PUB Standards shall be amended to reflect the following, subject to 3 SPARC approval: 4 5 a. Separate standards shall be developed for regulation of the units proposed 6 to replace the courtyard development. Standards shall include: 7 8 1) minimum off - street parking requirements of 2 covered, 1 9 uncovered stalls: 10 2) minimum setbacks of 10' from El Blvd. So. and 8' for all side 11 street yards: 12 3) provisions for regulation of building height, lot coverage, 13 alterations to the primary residence, accessory- uses and fencing 14 placement: 15 4) garage conversions may be permitted provided required parking is 16 replaced to City standards. 17 5) a minimum lot area standard consistent with the size of the 18 smallest lot proposed (3,300 sq. ft.), and language specifying i9 that no subdivision of lots is permitted. 20 21 b. Standards for the large -lot Country homes shall be modified to reflect: 22 23 1 j accessory structures shall not cover more than _ 5 0 1 `0 of required rear 24 yards. and maN not be located in required front and street side 25 yards. 26 2) a minimum setback of 10' shall be maintained for primary_ 27 structures from street side yard property lines. h 28 3) maximum building heights shall be measured from fini-shed pad 29 grades as defined on the public improvement plans.. 30 4) required off - street parking shall consist of 2 covered. 1 uncovered 31 stalls 3:2 5) garage conversions may be permitted provided required parking is .i.3 replaced to City_ Standards. 34 6) a minimum lot area standard consistent with the size of the .35 smallest lot proposed, and language specifying that no subdivision 36 of lots is permitted. 37 .38 4. The proposed unit distribution, lot configurations, lot - specific unit setbacks, and 9 all other design aspects of the PUB Plan shall be subject to SP ARC approval prior 40 to preparation of the first Final Map for the project. SPARC shall not have 41 authority to modify minimum standards imposed by the City Council as 42 mitigation measures or conditions of PUB Development Plan or Preventative Map 43 approval. 44 45 5. All proposed subdivision landscape plans shall be subject to SPARC approval, 46 including the Urban Separator street frontage treatment (plant palette, 47 pedestrian/bicycle path design, etc.). Prior to SPARC approval of the landscape 48 plans, comment shall be obtained from the Recreation. Music and Parks 49 Commission in order to facilitate coordination of desired Urban Separator /Open 50 Space uses and improvements (i.e., need for bollards, irrigation /utility stub -outs 51 etc.). However. the developer shall not be responsible for the costs of 9 Plannine Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 implementation of any Urban Separator improvements other than the public 2 landscape strip adjacent to the street, the associated irrigation system and the 3 combined pedestrian/bicycle path, unless required by other City agreements. 4 5 6. All proposed uses within the Urban Separator /Open Space areas to be dedicated 6 by the project developer shall be subject to separate applicable City /County 7 approval processes, in accordance with General Plan and Zoning Ordinance 8 provisions. 9 10 7. All aspects of the proposed project architecture shall be subject to SPARC 11 approval prior to application for approval of the first Final flap. 12 13 8. The following requirements of the Parks Director shall be met: 14 15 a. Planter strip on Casa Grande to resemble the planter strip on Casa Grande 16 to the west, adjacent to Adobe Creek. This will provide uniformity to 17 Casa Grande and allow adequate growing room for street trees. 18 19 b. Landscape planting berm along Casa Grande appears to be raised. 20 Architect to insure that raised area is not too severe. resulting in irrigation 21 run -off onto adjacent sidewalk and street. 22 23 C. Although plans do not reflect irrigation at this time. ensure that public area 24 landscaping adjacent to private lots is connected to the private lot 25 irrigation system (i.e., planter strips in front of homes). 26 27 d. All tree selections and planting areas to conform to the current City of 28 Petaluma list of approved street trees. 29 30 9. The following requirements of the Water Department shall be met: 31 32 a. Extend a 12 -inch water main from Eli- Boulevard South east through to 33 the east end of project placing it either in the roadway or roadway shoulder 34 so as to be accessible for repairs from an all weather surface. 35 36 b. Provide a 12 -inch water main on Allen Street from Casa Grande Road 12- .37 inch main to the east end of Rogers Lane stubbed out to the open space. 38 39 C. Dedicate a site for a future City water well on the east end of Rogers Lane 40 (in the open space). Provide an 8 -inch water stub and a 440 volt three 41 phase electric service to site for connection to the future well. Provide a 42 driveway cut, steel bollards, and chain. 43 44 10. Prior to SPARC approval of the project, an amended PUD Development Plan 45 shall be presented to the Pla G eFa ,issie ' City Council, which reasonably 46 reflects all of the Council - adopted conditions of project approval. The 47 CeffHnissioalCouncil shall make a finding of consistency with the intent of the 48 adopted mitigation measures and conditions of approval before further processing 49 of the project shall be permitted. 50 51 Findings for Pretentative Subdivision Man H Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 - 1 2 1. The proposed Cross Creek Pretentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is in 3 general conformity with the Urban Standard, Urban Separator. and Open Space 4 land use categories, and other applicable provisions of the General Plan. 5 6 2. The proposed Cross Creek Subdivision Map, as conditioned. is in general 7 conformity with the standards and intent of the PUD and Agriculture Zoning 8 Districts, the Floodplain Combining District, and other applicable provisions of 9 the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 10 11 3. The proposed Cross Creek Subdivision Map, as conditioned, is in general 12 conformance with the Petaluma Subdivision Ordinance and other applicable 13 provisions of the Petaluma Municipal Code. 14 15 4. The requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met 16 through preparation of an Initial Study and adoption of a Mitigated Negative 17 Declaration. to avoid or reduce to a level of insignificance, potential impacts of 18 the Cross Creek Subdivision. 19 20 5. The Cross Creel: Subdivision has met all requirements of the City of Petaluma 21 Residential Growth Management System, as specified under Chapter 17.26 of the 22 Municipal Code. 23 24 Pretentative it-Iap Conditions 25 26 1. The following conditions shall be addressed, submitted. and/or shown on 27 improvement plans and final map at the time of final map application. Conditions 28 a through g and j shall be constructed in conjunction with the first phase of 29 construction unless the improvements are more appropriately related to 30 subsequent phases as determined by the City Engineer: .31 32 a. Frontage improvements shall be required, as indicated, along Ely 33 Boulez and South and Casa Grande Road. Frontage improvements shall 34 include, but not be limited to, pavement curb, gutter. sidewalk. median 35 islands. landscaping and street lights. The existing pavement section of 36 Casa Grande Road shall be improved to arterial standards between 37 PeachNvood Court and the existing City limits. 38 39 b. The project applicant shall improve Casa Grande Road to accommodate 40 one through lane and bicycle lane together with a dedicated left turn lane 41 and right turn acceleration- deceleration lanes at Garfield Lane and one 42 through lane together with a dedicated left turn lane at the proposed Allen 43 Drive. 44 45 C. The project applicant shall improve Ely Boulevard South to accommodate 46 two through lanes and one bicycle lane in each direction together with a 47 dedicated V left turn lane. The existing tn parking lane adjacent to Casa 48 Grande High School and City athletic fields may be eliminated with 49 vvYitten consent of the Petaluma School District and the City of Petaluma 5o Parks Department. 51 Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 d. The applicant shall install a traffic signal, or roundabout as approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council, at the intersection of Ely Boulevard South at Casa Grande Road. The City Traffic Engineer shall approve the final intersection signalization and or improvement plan. A feasibility study by a registered traffic engineer shall be required for the roundabout design at the intersection of Casa Grande Road and Ely Road. e. The applicant shall pay the County of Sonoma 31% (based on the project traffic study) of the estimated cost of signalization at the intersection of Old Adobe Road at Casa Grande Road. The estimated cost shall be determined by the County of Sonoma Public Works Department.. f. The applicant shall submit, for approval by the City- Traffic Engineer, the final roundabout design at Garfield Lane and Cross Creek Street treet g If the existing county portion of Casa Grande Road is annexed then the following conditions shall apply: 1) Casa Grande Road shall be improved to arterial standards from the existing City limits to the new City limit location. Improvement shall include, but not be limited to one -half street improvements, curb. gutter, sidewalk and street li The one -half street dimension shall include one 12 -foot travel lane and one 6 -foot bike lane. 2) The existing box culvert and the Adobe Creek channel shall be cleaned and cleared of debris and siltation deposits to expose the entire cross sectional area of the box culvert and channel. 3) Submit a structural review of the existing box culvert. If the structural review reveals deficiencies in the box culvert. the developer shall make any necessary improvements to correct those deficiencies. 4) Improvement plans shall be submitted showing the additional box culvert crossing Casa Grande Road. Courivy approval of the additional box culvert shall be required if Casa Grande Road is not annexed. h. A minimum asphalt concrete thickness of three inches shall be applied to all public streets. No parking shall be posted along the southwest side of Cherrywood Circle and Peachwood Lane parallel to Casa Grande Road. No parking shall be posted adjacent to Parcel "C" along the cul -de -sac portion of Country Side Drive. j. Overhead utilities along the frontage of Casa Grande Road and the distribution portion of overhead utilities along Elv Boulevard shall be placed underground. Any overhead utilities traversing the project site shall also be placed underground. k. The 24 -inch storm drain that is shown on lot four of phase four shall be relocated to remain within the public right -of -way. 12 Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 • 1 2 1. All hydrologic, hydraulic and storm drain system design shall be subject to 3 review and approval by the Sonoma County Water Agency. 4 5 M. Each individual phase shall be designed to provide the required utilities 6 and street system independent of any other phase. 7 8 n. The developer shall demonstrate through calculations that the existing and 9 proposed water system is adequate for purposes of fire flow. The 10 developer shall be responsible for installing and /or constructing the y 11 necessary improvements to achieve the required fire flow. 12 13 0. Grading of site shall conform to the recommendations stated in the soils 14 investigation report prepared for this site. v 15 16 P. Lot to lot drainage shall not be allowed. 17 18 q. The developer shall demonstrate that a standard passenger vehicle can 19 negotiate all proposed private driveway areas. Vehicles should be able to 20 park, drive into garages, back out of garages and utilize these areas with 21 the same amount of turning movements associated with a typical parking lot. 23 24 r. A mechanism shall be created to provide for maintenance of shared 25 driveways, and any privately owned common areas. 26 ?? S. Surface drainage from private properties shall not flow over the surface of y 2s the sidewalk. 29 30 t: If public sanitary sewer mains are proposed to traverse private properties. 31 there shall be a public sanitary sewer easement at each location. 32 33 U. The developer shall keep the existing public streets clean that are used for 34 access to this site during construction. Construction access to this site 35 shall be limited to Ely Blvd. and Casa Grande Road. 36 37 V. The developer shall prepare improvements plans, prepare a final map, pay 38 applicable fees and contributions and submit the required reports and/or 39 documents according to latest City of Petaluma codes, ordinances, 40 resolutions, policies and standards. 41 42 W. if Wr- enPfive is not exteended- int0 the stibjeet subdivision, - a-eul a�e 43 st b ro rod a t t h e en d „fix; -,,, ran,-. < 44 45 2. The following requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be met: 46 47 a. Fire flow from individual fire hydrants to be not less than 1500 GPM. 48 49 b. The proposed number of hydrants for the subdivision appear acceptable, 50 however, some hydrant locations will require relocation. Approval of all 51 hydrants must be made by the Fire Marshal's office prior to final map. 52 13 Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 C. Any building, where the farthest portion of an exterior wall, is constructed in excess of 150 feet from a public way shall be provided with an access, minimum twenty (20) feet unobstructed all weather hard surface with thirteen feet -six inches (13'6 ") vertical height clearance. d. Post address at or near main entry door, a minimum of 4 inch letters. e. Address locators /directories will be required at the drivewav entrances of all structures set back off of the street frontage. Design of director shall be approved by the Planing Department and Fire Marshal's office. f. In residential buildings less than 3,500 sq. ft. in floor area. provide fire suppression system a t normal sources of ignition. These areas are specifically at clothes dryers, kitchen stoves, furnaces. water heaters, fireplaces and in attic areas at vents and chimneys for these appliances and equipment. In addition, spare sprinklers (one of each type in the residence) and «Tench shall be provided in a red spare sprinkler head box in the garage. g Residences constructed with less than a 20 foot access. shall be protected with a fire suppression system in accordance with N.F.P.D. 13-1) including attic spaces, garages, bathrooms with combustible fixtures, bathrooms over 55 sq. ft. and closets over 24 sq. ft. or over 3 feet deep. h. Add as a general note to plans: 1) No combustible construction is permitted above the foundation unless an approved all weather hard surface road is provided to within one hundred -fifty feet (150') of the farthest point of a building or structure. 2) All fire hydrants for the project must be tested. flushed. and in service prior to the commencement of combustible constriction on the site. All roofing material shall be rated class "B" or better, treated in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 32.7 and City of Petaluma Ordinance 1744. J. All roofing material applied as exterior wall covering shall have a fire rating of class "B" or better treated in accordance with Uniform Building Code Standard 32.7 and City of Petaluma Ordinance 1744. k. Provide approved parking islands at the end of all cul -de -sacs. 3. Prior to application for SPARC approval, the Map shall be amended to reflect the following: a. The public street sections for the project shall be modified to reflect a minimum street tree planter width of 6'. A portion of the sidewalk may be placed within a public pedestrian easement on the adjoining private property in order to accommodate this width. 14 Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 2 b. A combined pedestrian/bike path shall be provided continuously along the 3 Countryside Drive frontage of the Urban Separator, and shall connect with 4 that proposed at the northerly terminus of the street (vicinity of the 5 knuckle) and the path proposed along Casa Grande Road. 6 7 C. All modifications required by the adopted mitigation measures. and all 8 modifications necessary to reflect consistency with the PUD Development 9 Plan. 10 11 4. The location of all proposed electric transformers. or other utility structures shall 12 be identified on plans submitted for Final Map and Improvement Plan approval, 13 and located underground in accordance with adopted Civy policy. 14 15 5. The following requirements of the Chief Building Official shall be met: p 16 17 a. Grading must be certified when completed to indicate compliance with 8 approved plans and will be required for occupancy. 19 20 b. Soils vwith expansion index greater than 20 requires special design 21 foundation per Uniform Building Code 2904(b). 22 23 y C. All roofing shall be "B" rated or better per Ordinance No. 1744/1988. 24 25 d. Shoe site drainage and grading topography. y 26 27 e. Indicate all utilities on site plan. 28 29 f. Responsible pam to sign plans. 00 31 Cr Submit soils report to verify foundation design. 32 33 h. Indicate group occupancy, type of construction. square footage. 34 35 i. Provide structural calculations for all non - conventional design items. 36 ` 37 J. Demolition permit required to remove any structure. 38 39 k. Abandonment of water well or septic system must be done under permit 40 from County of Sonoma Public Health Department. 41 42 1. If application for building permit is submitted after January 1, 1996, the 43 plans must show conformance to the 1994 UBC. UPC. UNIC and 1993 44 NEC. Plans must also conform to the latest California Building Code 45 Title 24. .46 47 6. The following requirements of the Police Department shall be met: 48 49 a; Liahted and visible house numbers should be provided for all units. Solid 50 core wood doors with dead bolts should be installed with at least three ' 51 inch throws. "Peepholes" should be installed in each door. 52 15 Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 b. Currently Police and Fire response time is three minutes. In order to 2 maintain our response time it is recommended the street names in the 3 proposed subdivision be changed. Street names similar to existing street 4 names may create confusion and become a potential problem to City 5 personnel as described previously. 6 7 C. A Homeowner's Association is mentioned in the plans and is encouraged. 8 9 d. Parking violations on shared private driveways cannot be enforced by 10 Police personnel. Vehicles parked over 72 hours or, blocking another 11 resident's access must be enforced and regulated by Homeowner's 12 Association members / private property owners. 13 14 7. All proposed street names shall be subject to the approval of the Street Naming 15 Committee prior to SPARC approval of the Map. 16 17 8. Dedication of the proposed Urban Separator / Open Space parcel shall occur in 18 conjunction with the first Final Map, unless alternate timing is approved by 19 separate agreement between the City of Petaluma and the subdivider. 20 21 9. This project shall be subject to imposition of all applicable special development 22 fees, which shall be calculated and paid in accordance with adopted City 23 Resolutions. 24 25 10. The applicants /developers shall defend, indemnify.. and hold harmless the City or 26 any of its boards, commission, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, 27 action or proceeding against the City, its boards, commission, agents, officers, or 28 employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project when 29 such claim or action is brought within the time period provided for in applicable 30 State and /or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the 31 applicants /developers of any such claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall 32 coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the 33 City from participating in a defense of any claim, action, or proceeding if the City 34 bears its own attorney's fees and costs, and the City the action in good 35 faith. 36 37 11. All street trees, perimeter fencing /walls and other improvements within the public 38 right -of -way on Elv Boulevard So., Casa Grande Road and all interior public 39 streets, as well as landscaping located within public access /landscape easements 40 shall be maintained by a Landscape Assessment District (LAD) through contract 41 services subject to approval of the City Council in conjunction with each 42 applicable Final Map. Landscaping within these areas shall be designed and 43 installed to City standards acceptable to City of Petaluma Planning, Engineering, 44 Public Works and Parks staff. Irrigation to serve all landscaping in street tree 45 planter strips adjacent to private residences shall be designed to connect with the 46 private lot irrigation systems of the adjoining lots. Separate irrigation systems 47 shall be established for street frontage landscape areas located between the street 48 curb and subdivision perimeter walls and for landscape islands. Costs of 49 formation of the required LAD shall be borne by the project proponents at time of 50 the appropriate Final Map application. 51 Gid E Planning Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 OTHER BUSINESS 2 III. GENERAL, PLAN AMENDMENT ISSLES;. CITY OF PETALUMA (jcm). 4 5 General discussion of issues associated with requests for amendments to the 6 General Plan. .7 8 Principal Planner McCann - Introduced discussion. 9 10 DISCUSSION: 11 12 Commissioner Wick - Would like to see a listing of recent General Plan amendments. 1�3 Commissioner Bennett - Comfortable with current amendment process. 14 Commissioner Wick - Possibly school sites in future could have dual designations 15 (School and Residential); if an amendment is unwanted for a specific project, should 16 environmental review not be undertaken - should run this question past City Attorney. 17 Planning. Director Tuft - Discussed CEQA applicability to denied projects and options rs available to the City. 1 -9 20 Commission requested that the City Attorney look into this issue. 21 22 Consensus of the Commission is that the present process is acceptable. 23 24 2'5 IV. PLANNING COMMISSION RULES AND REGULATIONS; CITY OF 26 PETALti 7�-IA. 28 General discussion of and possible action regarding the Plam - iing Commission's 29 Rules and Regulations for the Transaction of Business. 30 31 DISCUSSION: '2 Commissioner Wick - City of Petaluma rules and regulations. are much more 34 contemporary than others seen - some suggestions for amendment: 35 6 - Include provision for the adoption of a motion for action on Minutes. 37 - Formalize looking at future agendas to help busy scheduling - go over 38 future agendas verbally. 39 - Initiate a preliminary review process (similar to SPARC Preliminary 40 Review process). f 41 - Establish second vice -chair position. 42 43 Commissioner Bennett - Concern with unclear. archaic ,vording (Page 7, No. 803 - Page 44 4, No. 505) specifically "time to time "; should be re«Titten. 45 46 Commissioner Thompson - Incorporate Commissioner Wick's 4 suggestions. '47 48 Commissioner Feibusch - Regarding meeting adjournment time - would like to extend 49 meetings to allow all who would like to speak. 50 17 Planning, Commission Minutes - September 10, 1996 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Commissioner Bennett - Concerned with the provision regarding abstaining; does this only apply to cases of financial conflict - can staff look at this wording to allow other abstention reasons. ` V. LIAISON REPORTS - None. Commissioner Feibusch - Will not be able to attend Oct. 8 Planning Commission meeting. Planning Director Tuft - Senior Planner Vin Smith will attend APA Conference and accept an award recognizing historic planning efforts for Petaluma's Growth Manauement Svstem. ` ADJOURNMENT: 9:20 PM. min0910 / plan72 18